Concepts for Khitans and Jurchens

I highly recommend these two civilizations for a new DLC, even if they may not be same as the design I’m going to state at following. This thread is purely for sharing ideas, and the designs don’t necessarily have perfect balance or historical context.


They were what the word Cathay refers to, a Para-Mongolic people deeply influenced by Uyghurs and Tungus, and a nomadic civ who were good at forging and espionage, especially the latter. According to some Chinese sources, from the borders to the cities, many common people like beggars, women, businessmen, monks, were found to be hired to collect information for Liao Empire, making Song officials very cautious.

  • Blacksmiths and armor upgrades can be built and researched one age earlier.
    (The last armor upgrades +1/+1 in Castle Age, then automatically +0/+1 in Imperial Age.)
  • Villagers’ work efficiency +1% for every researched armor upgrade tech.
    (Includes Loom so +10% totally.)
  • Reveal the location of enemy Castles like revealing Wonders.

Team bonus: Ranged units +1 attack vs Gunpowder units.
(Helps against Janissaries, Conquistadors, Organ Guns and Hussite Wagons, especially in Castle Age.)

Castle UT: Treaty (400 F, 300 G)
Researched complete in 1 second! All players immediately cease fire for 30 seconds as a treaty.
After this treaty ends, trickles 0.25 gold per second as long as at least a castle is existing.

Imperial UT: Ordo (800 F, 800 G)
Cavalry Archers no longer have the gold cost but double the wood cost.
Within the Liao Empire of the Khitans, the word ordo was used to refer to a nobleman’s personal entourage or court, which included servants, retainers, and bodyguards. Emperors, empresses, and high ranking princes all had ordos of their own, which they were free to manage in practically any way they chose.

Some kind of heavy armored cavalry archers who use crossbows or short bows, maybe named “Tielin” or just Crossbow Cavalry, Armored Cavalry Archer, Cataphract Archer.
They’d have shorter range, slower rate of fire, lower speed and higher cost but also having obviously stronger HP, attack and armor, supposed to well work with trash CA.

  • HP: 80 → 100
  • attack: 7 → 8, +1 → +2 vs cavalry
  • rate of fire: 2.5
  • frame delay: 55
  • attack delay: 1
  • range: 3
  • projectile speed: 7
  • accuracy: 80%
  • armor: 1/1 → 2/2
  • speed: 1.35
  • LoS: 6
  • upgrade cost: 700 F, 850 G

Tech tree:
Economy: no Two-Man Saw.
Blacksmith: Full.
Castle: no Sappers.
Barrack: no Halberdier.
Stable: no Paladin, but having Elite Steppe Lancers.
Archery Range: no Arbalester, Heavy CA and Hand Cannoneer.
Siege Workshop: no Siege Onager and Bombard Cannon.
University: no Architecture, Fortified Wall and Bombard Tower.
Monastery: no Redemption, Fervor and Block Printing.
Dock: no Shipwright and Cannon Galleon line.


Although culturally and geographically close to the Mongols and Khitans, Jurchens were not actually considered nomads. They were sedentary while hunting and fishing was the way of life. In the Middle Ages they built a heavy cavalry regiment that swept across China (“Iron Pagoda”, or “Tiefutu”), and their pirates invaded Korea and Japan (“Toi invasion”).

  • Free cavalry armor upgrades.
  • Hunters and Fishermen do not require Mills or TCs to drop off food but work 10% slower.
  • Fishing boats move 10% faster, and can shoot arrows with weak attack after hitting Feudal Age (to allow them able to attack like Villagers).
  • Fish last 50% longer.

Team bonus: UTs cost -33%.
(If there would be another new civ (eg. Göktürks) with a team bonus which allows UTs to be researched slowly at TCs, it could be a nice partner with Jurchens.)

Castle UT: Iron Pagoda, or Tiefutu (300 F, 300 G)
Cavalry units have +2 attack vs UUs.
Based on the famous heavy cavalry regiment of the Jin Dynasty.

Imperial UT: Miŋgan Moumukə (600 F, 500 G)
Returns 15% of the cost of military units after they are killed.
Based on the basic social organization of the Jurchens which later became the prototype of the Manchu Eight Banners.

Some kind of ranged melee cavalry who look like Iron Flail of AoE3,with scorpion-like piercing effect which could make enemy -10% speed and rate of fire.
HP: 100 → 120
attack: 5 → 7, +2 → +3 vs foot archer units
range: 1
rate of fire: 2
accuracy: 100%
armor: 1/3 → 2/3
speed: 1.4
LoS: 6
Upgrade cost: 800 F, 700 G

Regional unit: Fire Lance, available for Chinese, Koreans, Jurchens and Mongols.
In East Asia (China), the early military use of gunpowder was to mount it on a spear. Although the English term is lance, it was actually more commonly used by infantry.
Fire Lances could be classified as Siege weapon units and Infantry units, and trainable at Siege Workshops since Castle Age. Attack power and range are upgraded through Siege Engineers, while armor is shared with infantry. Their projectiles have a “melee” blast damage with a radius of about 1 when hitting a target or the ground, good at against siege weapons, buildings, ships, and dense units (like archers), but cannot handle a large number of melee units, especially light cavalry, due to its slow fire and slow movement.
Can +4 attack by Rocketry, +1 range by Shinkichon, but cannot +50% speed by Drill.

Tech tree:
Economy: no Two-Man Saw.
Blacksmith: no Plate Mail Armor.
Castle: no Hoardings.
Barrack: no Supplies and Squires.
Stable: no Heavy Camel Rider, but having Elite Steppe Lancers.
Archery Range: Full.
Siege Workshop: no Siege Onager and Bombard Cannon, but having Fire Lances.
University: no Architecture, Keep and Bombard Tower.
Monastery: no Redemption, Fervor and Sanctity.
Dock: Full.

1 Like

Tbh all that’s sounds a bit akward to be implemented. Like no one is gonna make armor upgrades in dark ag because of that. Also the reduced last armor in castle age I don’t think is worth it considering its high cost.

However I kinda like the underlying concept of tying worker efficiency to other upgrades (or give eco effects to non eco techs more generally). It’s similar to the bohemian bonus and imo this is one of the most promising ways for future civ design. It’s pretty coherent with how the games works and gives refreshing dynamics without introducing new gimmicks.

That’s a pretty cool bonus.

Just because of arena castle drops? That’s a bit too niche imo although it certainly helps in these scenarios. If theres a historical foundation for that maybe extend it to all units get that +1.

No. Just no 11

Also no. Completely op. At least the civ needs to lose bracer (probably not even enough). One of the most efficient late game gold unit shouldn’t get a trash version.

I really wonder what this civ would play. Hussar cav archer I guess but apart from that it doesn’t really have anything to offer. I’d rather work some of your UU ideas into the UT and give them a non cav archer UU for some more versatility.

I’m not sure how well this is balanced with a civ that has access to knights.

You are aware that this is probably a negative eco bonus for your standard map? I don’t think thid bonus makes sense. No need to drop off is op on some maps like nomad and slower workrate is a nerf compared to generic civs on your regular arabia arena and whatnot map where your hunt is under the tc.

Maybe give them hunt laster longer or sth like that?

1 Like

It’s intended to be a late game bonus and is not meant to be for the Dark Age. If the player is willing to spend a lot of resources to research armor early, in addition to gaining military advantages, he can also enjoy this economic bonus earlier, that’s all.

If you get +3/+4 in Castle Age, I’m worried that the knights will be too strong. A crossbowman’s arrow can only deal 1 damage. It’s already been seen that people will actively acquire Chemistry in Castle Age, and I think the last armor will too.

In my experience, the arena as well as closed maps are not the only place to encounter these gunpowder UUs. Since this benefits all ranged units, I think +1 is enough.
The Khitan defeated the Seljuks in the Battle of Qatwan, which could be its historical foundation. Although gunpowder was not yet used by the Turks at the time, the Turks in the game used frequently.

I’m not going to argue this with you, but the ceasefire is actually not a new concept.
Compared to the concepts also from AoE3, this is more interesting, more strategically valuable, and more suitable for AoE2 than the Flemish Revolution and the First Crusade in my opinion. That’s all.

They do Not have Heavy upgrade. I have calculated the stats and I think it should be fine.
If the need arises, the wood cost of trash CA could be higher (to maybe 100).
If it needs more, the Bloodline could even be removed. (But the castle knight would be nerfed and UU should get +20HP back.)

Before the Imperial Age, players have the opportunity to acquire stronger military units. This in itself is an advantage. The knights with more armors even have a chance to end the game in Castle Age.

Of course this is a powerful military bonus.
So they also only have this military bonus.

I already gave the Göktürks the bonus that the prey has more food content (last longer), so…

If needed, I’d first try to make them as same -5% as the Khmers. But the fact that the food is handed over right away is actually pretty powerful, and I don’t even think gathering 10% slower (not equal to gather 10% less food) is hardly a threat to this bonus. This includes even more hidden benefits, such as scouts not having to chase deer, allowing more active access to map information, etc.

Personally I would make the Iron Pagoda the UU. Maybe it could deal trample damage attack while moving, but not standing still? It could be like a different kind of Cataphract.

Personally I hope that a unit should have to fire to deal damage intuitively, otherwise not only is the style out of tune with AoE2, it may be difficult to balance, and even technically difficult to achieve. Clearly I’m not a fan of dealing trample damage attack while moving, and I also think that units can’t stand still will cause operational difficulties and be very annoying to players. Sorry.

On the other hand, the Iron Pagoda seems to me to be just a heavy cavalry troop, and it is enough to have the Paladins represent them. I’d rather have a special cavalry, and the snare mechanic from AoE3 I think would be interesting in AoE2 as well. If you’re also an AoE3 player, you’ll be able to better imagine what it looks like in-game. Technically this would be similar to Obuch, changing enemies’ stats until they heal.

I actually have a similar bonus for Tarascans in a scenario I’m making. It’s not a huge bonus but could be used to get armor techs while aging up (mostly to Castle/Imp), or to get a higher tech level in large feudal/castle fights. (In my version the last armor also gives the full benefit, but its easier to balance).

AoM vibes here. Don’t love it for AoE2, to say nothing of the forced diplomacy aspect, or what getting free gold has to do with a ceasefire.

Other than that, the bonuses and UUs all like viable.

It has nothing to do with diplomacy actually. In AoE3, the diplomacy relations are not changed when a player use the ceasefire ability of Taj Mahal. You can see the defensive buildings are still allowed to fire the enemy.

This is technically possible to not affect the diplomacy. Even if there may be a brief alliance, there will be system messages (like Atheism, the First Crusade and the Flemish Revolution) and a countdown timer to notify all players.

The value of the introduction of the ceasefire is that it provides an unprecedented strategic possibility, which I personally think will make the game interesting, and it is actually surprisingly easy to adapt.

The gold trickle gives this emergency button a small permanent effect instead of just 30 seconds.
Historically, the Chanyuan Treaty brought Liao rich and stable financial benefits from the Song.

1 Like

On theory it create tons of diversity by having these unique power spikes, however, wouldn’t it be OP when it comes to Bracer and Bodkin?
In order to implement this huge bonus you must have a civ that lacks eco bonus and/or Blacksmith techs

Overkill. Too much.

That’s great, extremely useful yet not so much OP. Though I’d limit it to Castles that are already built. You dont want to punish Castle Droppers and boldness. This civ is already too boomy (for no reason) to begin with.

Fair enough, I’d make it +2.

Age of Mythology? :slight_smile:
People would be able to build stuff during the treaty? unlike AOM the potential builders abusiveness in this game is huge. In AOM they cant build Fortification as far as I remember.
This is probably the most game-breaking feature in the game, the most unique one, and borderline “not AOE”. So I’m not sure yet about it, though I’m trying not to be too conservative and still figure a way to implement it. Open for discussion.

Cant be done, the idea of trash CA is too hard to implement. You’d have to have a civ that lacks not just HCA, but also Bracer and Thumbring. Your implementation of this feature is far far far from being balancable.
You always have to consider Kamandaren, you basically offer a better deal regardless of the price, it’s absurd. Especially when the civ has FU Hussars.
Within this civ’s tech tree / identity, I dont see this one happening, no way to make it happen.

What’s the cost of this one?
It’s basically a hybrid of a Wagon and a Mameluke. I like the idea of having just 3 range. Though it’s too early to judge, training time and cost are important, so is the fact they’re affected by the blacksmith bonus.
I’d make it more harmonic to the civ’s identity, this civ has full legitimacy to go for a prolonged Castle Age, Usually all ranged UU are desperate for Imp in order to get Bracer. Why not changing the scaling between the normal unit and its Elite version. Flat Attack value of 8? yet less HP or Armor (non Elite)? Again, it’s hard to tell because I’m missing the price. It seems like a very expensive unit though. (just like Wagon and Mameluke)

Overall far from being a complete civ, too much conceptual holes and ideas that can only be implemented forcefully

I love “free” stuff, it creates smooth versatile power spikes. However this one seems even better than the Magyars, where’s the catch?

I wouldn’t include Fishermen, it’s way too abusable in many maps, a vill can just box himself with the shore with 3 palasides, it’s going to look ugly.
Regarding Hunters, it has been discussed a lot in here, the lame potential is just too big, to a point where you’d just send your very first vill to lame deer/boar. I dont see a way to punish it but a vill fight, on Arabia, weird. And they can gather resource during the vill fight at times of idling. Very unplayable.

Borderline not AOE, however again, I’m trying to be open to new concepts. Attacking Fishing Ships is a huge concept. Why ranged attack? Why not semi-melee attack? Why not a suicide effect like Demo? Why do they have to have movement speed bonus on top of that? And an fishing eco bonus as well? Attacking Fishing Ships as itself is an indirect eco bonus on water map, it’s less punishing spamming one or two more Fishing ships.
This one needs a whole discussion including stats…

This is a nice bonus, but not for this civ, you already have fast moving fishing ships (this one increase gathering rate by a lot) and fishermen-palaside-box abuse. Overkill.

Interesting, I like the use of bold numbers.


It’s a global bonus, just like the previous civ that had 10% working rate, this one basically means 15% discount on all units, regardless the res nor unit. Roughly.
Global bonuses are bad, this what makes Portuguese such an awful civ, and we’re just talking about the gold cost. It’s hard to balance and offers nothing strategic nor playable to play around.
Plus this one just encourage Noobism. Saracens Madrasah got changed for a reason.

Again, it’s very hard to judge an unit without a cost. (and training time)
3 pierce armor + anti Archer bonus is nice, considering the +2 armor, it makes them very viable. The idea of Mounted Huskarl is yet to be implemented in the game, this is clearly an interpretation of it.
I’d definitely remove access from Plate Barding Armor, and adjust this UU’s Elite stats.

Too much water gimmicks and laming gimmicks, it’s hard to take this one seriously, incomplete

Thanks for this detailed civ design nonetheless !

Even if you do all that you still have a trash mounted archer unit thst has the dmg output as an arbalest. That means you have cav archer hussar being one of the strongest late games army comp without the need to spend any gold. That’s way too strong. You’d need to remove a lot of techs (like bracer thumbring parthian tactics last archer armor and bloodlines) to make that balanced. That’s why I don’t think this idea should be implemented.

Well food from boars is the most crucial resource in dark age. And by reducing that speed you heavily nerf the civ. On some maps like nomad and a lot of mega random generations that bonus would be op I think. On arabia it’s still awkward because you lose vil efficiency by moving out to dear and moving back to other resources. Also your opponent can just drush you or sth like that. And on arena hideout where you always push in all your deer anyways that civ would be just the single worst eco wise as it has worse eco than a completely generic one.

No attack upgrade there. I only stated armor upgrade.
3 for infantry, 3 for cavalry, 3 for archers, that’s all.
Add the Loom, there are 10 armor upgrades totally, and at most +10% work efficiency to Villagers.

Absolutely not. In Feudal Age, your Villagers can have at most +7% only, and before this you have to pay many many resources to research the techs first. I think according to the normal process, most players in Castle Age will only get +5%.

The blueprint for the concept of the ceasefire here is based on the Taj Mahal in AoE3, not AoM.
I don’t know how the ceasefire works in AoM, but the ceasefire in AoE3 seems to be the better version. At least, none of the trivial issues you worry about.

I thought it was an interesting idea so I brought it up. I’m not really employed by the development team, so I don’t care that much about balance.

I accept your doubts about this. But I’d still rather try to crank up the wood cost first, or change from -100% gold cost to -33% or -50% (then HCA might be coming back). If the CA needs to be weakened in such way you mentioned, then the UU has to be compensated accordingly, because the UU is also a CA type unit.

The reason Madrasah is replaced is because it only benefits monks, not because it returns costs.
Your opinion of the Portuguese has nothing to do with me. For me, the Portuguese are an interesting civ and still have a presence in competitions.

Its main selling point should still be the snare ability in my opinion.
Then I’d rather reduce its armor to +1/+1 to preserve the paladin’s performance.

So would it be better to set it to -0%? Or are there no limits on how many hunters and fishermen can carry?

Oh sorry about that, my bad!

But what does global 5% gives you? it’s too general.
Examples of interesting eco bonuses:

  • Vikings and Aztecs one, huge powerspike at early game and completely useless as the game gets to Post Imp.
  • Slavs one, can only be utilized the more you’re invested in farming eco
  • Teutons one, same, also increase viability for early farming eco which isn’t always convinient
  • Turks one AND Saracens one, encourage Market “abuse” which is a legitimate economical tactic
  • Mongols one and Mayans one, an extreme Dark Age powerspike while barely any change later.
  • Cumans one, offers a greedy route, high risk high reward, highly strategic.
  • Bonuses like Huns, Lithuanians, Khmer, Japanese and Poles, you actually experience them as you play, what you suggest is just a flat bonus that get stronger at the game goes, no quailities of gameplay experience nor any degree of playability or decision making, none will really go out of his mind to tech into something just for the sake of 1% boost.

It’s too flat to shape an identity of a civ nor be playable and strategic.
Similarly to the “eco” bonus of Portuguese which is just bad design.

The idea of a trash CA is fine, it just doesnt fit this civ by any mean. I’m all for going bold, -100% gold is alright, the problem is the implementation. It must be about the same strength as Kamandaren.
Therefore must lack: Bracer, Thumbring, Husbandry, HCA, and the Parthian Tactics tech. And even then, this unit is a brutal win condition for the very late stages of the game. I remind you this civ has a FU Hussar.

Most people (and pro players) agree that this is the most generic civ in AOE, before the Imperial Age if you dont utilize Organ Guns you end up with a plain civ, nothing playable, no powerspikes, and it gets worse once you’re forced to make trash units. One of the worst designs in AOE.

Snare is interesting.

As I’ve stated, this economic bonus is intended to serve the late game, but players can enjoy it earlier if they’re willing to use the another military bonus, the main bonus.

You should focus on the main bonus, the chance to get military units with more armor before the Imperial Age. Players would still research armors for stronger military units, not for the economy bonus. Each armor tech +1% work efficiency is just a small candy to reward players for researching armor as soon as possible. Up to +10% work efficiency is late game compensating for the resource cost of researching armor too early in the game.

That’s one of our very big differences. I don’t think being generic is a bad thing, it’s even part of the character of civilization.

Even though I rarely use the organ guns, my experience with the Portuguese has been not bad. In team games or in closed-map games, the Portuguese design gives me a flexible and smooth experience.

Almost everyone hates the aoe3 mechanics that have already made it in game and you think its a good idea to add more? No thanks.

1 Like

As a player with a more open mind enjoying both AoE2 and AoE3, I don’t care about where a machinic from. :grinning:

I know there are some forum users who don’t accept new concepts, but I also observed that not everyone can’t accept it, and even some people like it quite a bit. People who don’t strongly like or hate don’t actively speak up, and these are the vast majority.

I think initially aok wanted such a mechanic but dropped idea how it was going to be implemented.

1 Like

Glad they didn’t add it.

1 Like

This is great as I said.

However the small “candy” kind of a reward is just a bad concept, it doesnt do anything, the random pathing has the same effect. I’m all for new ideas, but a gimmick that doesnt really serve a strategic purpose- why?

Besides that, in late-game it doesnt do anything meaningful, just another Slavs/Khmer bonus. On top of that UT that gives them practically 15% reduction on all military expenses. It’s either OP or identity-less.

Being generic is never an identity trait, every civ should have an actual playable feature, for the sake of diversity and history. Portuguese “empire” is far from representing genericism.

Adding the Tanguts/Tibetans, Khitans and Jurchens as any Chinese DLC would be good. We could have a Tang or Song Dynasty campaign, as well as one for the Koreans who fought the Tang. A Tang Taizong, Wu Zetian or An Lushan campaign would be awesome! Some recent videos made by this guy specialised on Chinese historical content.