Could you give us more American and African content?

I know, but if I said that, someone would sprout out of nowhere just to tell me “but bohemians were culturally closer to Teutons” lol

Ok. But would you like to elaborate which ones are too comprehensive?

Kongo and Mutapa waged war against the Portuguese. Kongo even allied with the Dutch (±Burgundians) against them. Kanem waged war against neighboring peoples who can be represented by Malians and Ethiopians (although not ideal).

My point is that isolated depends on the reference point. For the sinosphere the Europeans were isolated. For the Vikings, the Japanese and Koreans were isolated because they didn’t interact with each other. So this argument is weak.


Reference point is current ingame civis,tonga had no connections to any of them.

1 Like

Yes. But if we find any civ like Mongols that link Tonga to Southeast Asia for example, could they join?

Minimum could should be two but if tonga or anyone else has some connection to the rest of the civis its perfectly fine to have them.

1 Like

Chimus are moche people. Saying they are similar is like saying that Japanese and Koreans are “chinese” people just because they are asians and may be similar. In that same vein, Waris are chanka people. Aztecs are nahua people. Mayans are maya people. Incas are quechua-puquina people.

I also see it this way. For America, I posted suggestions about Chimus and Waris because both were continental powers with bronze weapons and large empires during their timeline. On top of that, their history is interesting and makes you wonder how the New world would have been if they hadn’t fallen, or had fallen 50 years later. For Asia, I suggested Tibetans and Thais because they were prominent regional powers and their history is amazing. Both became powerful empires even though historically they were the underdogs for centuries. Tibetans and Thais defeated their lifelong rivals the Chinese and the Khmer respectively.
On another note, these are my suggestions. Even if you disagree with the civs, at least read the history part:


If think if there was another empire around the same region as the Tonga it would be enough

1 Like

Thanks for the suggestions. I’m going to read about Waris and Chimus. Tibetans and Thais I already know about.

1 Like

Samoa would be an option. They’d do the same thing like they did with SEA and Central America. Adding a bunch of them at the same time. Maori would be awesome but kinda late.

By the way, we already have plenty non-Empires in the game. Even the latest additions are not really empires ironically.

Anyway, there’s plenty of options left everywhere in Africa and America like the Kanem Bornu Empire, the Swahili, the Hausa, the Yoruba, the Songhay, the Munhumutapa/Zimbabweans, the Kongolese the Chimu, the Muisca, the Chichimecs, the Pueblo, the Mississippians, the Haudenosaunee and plenty others.

Well they did find Polynesian products in Peru, Southern as well as central Americas and a lot of cultural+linguistic aspects + products in South East Asia showing that the Polynesians (Mouri,Tonga,Samoans and more) had traderoutes and diplomatic connections all over the Pacific , thus they did interact with civs such as Malay,Khmer,Inca and Aztechs.

If they do add the Polynesians to the game I would love for them to have a Dock UU the Catamaran - fast moving trade cogs that fires defensive arrows whilst traveling along trade routes.

Polynesians/ Tuʻi Tonga Empire.

Tribal infantry and naval civ

Civ has no war gallies nor fire ships but instead have tribal war catamarans that is 0.5 pop space.
UU castle/Luakini: Ali’i/Maori warrior - Wielding an elongated wooden club bristling with shark teeth all along its edges. Can traverse (swim over) narrow rivers and small bodies of water .
Unique tech 1: Haka - Infantry gain + 1 attack and + 1 armour.
Unique tech 2: Fa’amatai : Stellar navigators allows all coastlines to become explored and all great fish to become visible .
Civ team bonus : Increased fishing ship gather rate.
Civ bonus: Shore fish last longer.
Wonder : Moai (Stone heads )

Either that (especially Caucasus with unique bsets) or if we go with an overoptimistic route to please most people here then we could have a final 5-civ Forgotten 2.0 DLC but I doubt it would ever happen :pensive:


The euro civs were already too numerous in Age2x and FE with almost half of them being from Europe .

Nah I think Italians are fine as they are

1 Like

download (1)

Keeping hist.battles aside , we have 5 campaigns in Africa page out of which 3 take place mostly or entirely outside of Africa (Francesco d’Almeida , Saladin ,Tariq ibn Ziyad )

1 Like

Saracen Berbers Mali Ethiopia all held lands in africa.

1 Like

Tbh Saracens are kind of an stretch, but yeah they can represent Egypt and stuff

Even if you count Saracens as African civ (which would make Tatars, Turks, Berbers, Saracens, Mongols European civs too considering they controlled some land for some time in Europe), it would still be 5 (counting Porto and Sara too) African civs compared to 20+ European civs.

3 complete african civis 2 central asian 3 meso 1 indian 4 sea 4 east asian compared to europe.

1 Like

So you agree that one half of the civs are European while the rest of the world has to share the other I see.

Don’t you think that it might be a better call to take care of the continents which need the most new civs instead of keep adding civs in regions where you can easily find a neighbouring substitute civs?

1 Like

I never disagreed there are too much europe factions but that is no reason to add isolated people groups that fits aoe3 and colonial era.


To be fair, it is a game set in the Middle Ages or Medieval period, both which imply European history between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance . I’m all for adding variety of civs because they are interesting and fun, but it’s not really an expectation to represent every culture of the world equally in a game with such a defined focus.