Feel free to disagree, but the people that create the definitions seem to think it’s a European term.
3 Likes
There’s also Medieval era as in Post-classical history:
3 Likes
Just say you hate non-Europeans and move on.
I shouldn’t even reply to this nonsense. You know nothing about me or my background. If you must know, at least one of the civilizations requested in this thread includes my ancestors. That doesn’t mean the developers have any obligation to include it in their European-centered medieval game.
Edit: Scroll up and you’ll see I was one of the first to support this thread. I just don’t agree with anyone thinking they’re entitled to representation in AoE2.
3 Likes
Ensemble themselves never gave any requirements for any civ to be included in the game, including time period (as shown by the fact Goths and Huns are in the game and Celts represent Picts and Gauls [who also didn’t live in the middle ages] in addition to medieval Scottish), so the fact you’re gatekeeping civs “because they’re not advanced enough” is not a good look regardless of your ancestry.
And as other people said, the “European-centered” game you defend so vehemently had East Asians since the very first moment, when they didn’t interact with Europeans until the late middle ages at the earliest.
Pretty sure you’re replying to the wrong person. I’m in favor of adding American and African civs, even if they don’t have the same technology. Look at Inca slingers for example, throwing stones can work fine within game balance.
I see. Sorry for misinterpreting then.
1 Like
Additional African Civs would be great, but please only 1-2 more Central/South American civs at most and no North America ones since:
-
This game is set in the Middle Ages and at the very beginning of the Columbian era, if the devs are basing the design of the Civs in historical fact (Which they always do even if they are inaccurate at times, like with Korean War Wagons which are based on the Hwacha, Historical Korean Cavalry Archery and represent the defensive nature of medieval Koreans), the Civs must always have no access to Gunpowder and Horses which greatly limits the scope of design with the Civ. If you hand-waved that away and said “oh they get access to it in Imp instead” you run into the issue of implying that the peak of their Civillisations occured when they were “enlightened” by Europeans.
-
There is very little clear historical information about the politics of pre-coloumbian America (especially North America) that could make for good source material for a campaign, the official scenarios of this game are always based in Historical fact.
-
The Incas Civ has severe issues with distinguishing themselves identity wise from Aztecs and Mayans, they should be sorted out first before the addition of anymore American civs are considered.
-
Age of Empires 3 (DE) exists which already gives representation to North American civs and breath to the idea of Native Americans with gunpowder without conflicting with itself historically.
2 Likes
- There is already civs without stables and gunpowder.
- Campaigns are not that historical accurate. Some have are heavily based on legends or are mixed with them even in the pre/post-game texts.
- Good point on Inca distinguishing themselves from meso civs. Though it can be done at same time new civs are added.
- Some have pointed civs that could be included in the game and how, like AnaWinters and Szaladon
The celtic campaign literally has the Scots winning at the end, the franks campaign literally has people who were long dead by the end of it, n2m a narrator who isn’t real.
And then there’s this…
https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/comments/dy7hw7/my_list_of_historical_inaccuracies_in_aoe2/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
2 Likes
I’m not disagreeing with that, I am just saying that the design of a hypothetical American civ would always be more limited than an African Civ.
That was not my point, my point was that the Campaigns and their missions are almost always based on things that actually happened in real life. Sure there may of not being any French soldiers who used Throwing Axes during the Hundred Years War, but Joan of Arc was somebody who actually existed, the Siege of Orleans was an event that actually happened and was a thing she was involved with, etc.
In the case of a hypothetical Mississipian Civ for instance there are no clear historical figures pre-columbian to base things off, there is no specific war to talk about, no political crisis to analyze. Maybe I’m wrong and there is infact clear historical records of such things that could work for a campaign, but a hypothetical Mississpian Campaign that is entirely pre-columbian would have to be near complete fiction.
This is why I prefer any new American civs to be additional Meso ones, they actually have a decent breadth of historical records that survived the ages. The Dos Pilas Mayan scenario for instance actually talks about real individuals and a real political situation that occured in real life.
2 Likes
Yeah, but all civs are limited in a way or another to balance, so it’s not an issue 
It’s been some time that I played almost all campaigns, but Prithviraj follows his legend, not historical sources.
Sure there are legends about real people among north american civs that can follow this model. I could google some, but don’t have time nor really wish to do it now.
-
Are you being purposely obstinate? I clearly mean limited in design not game balance, I.E. There can be African civs based on Cav and or Gunpowder, you can’t have that for American Civs for reasons already stated.
-
Prithviraj and his exploits are not completely fictional, the campaign mostly covers events that genuinely happened and in the last mission of the Scenario, it even talks about the embellished legendary aspect of him you mentioend, as you play as his court poet spreading his legend around India.
-
The pre-columbian North American equivalent on the other hand would most likely have to be near complete pure fiction, Which is considered a big no-no by this game throughout it’s 20+ years of existence. There’s a reason why we have no Elves or Dwarves Civ in this game with a campaign that involves them fighting against the evil Orc Lord Saurguts, this game even if it is inaccurate in some places or engages in some historical fiction (Like William Wallace winning the real life battle of Falkirk) has it’s two feet firmly planted in history.
TL;DR The Prithviraj Campaign is actually based on things that genuinely happened even if some parts of it are embellished, a potential pre-columbian North American would have to be near complete fiction. Which has always being considered a nono by this game as it is purely historically based even if it is inaccurate in some places, or engages in historical fiction writing.
Of course I could be wrong about the lack of North Americna history sources and I’m happy to be proven as such
1 Like
- I’m not being obstinate, I’m just pointing out you argument is weak because there are already civs that lack both of these things you pointed, not to talk about those that lack it in some way or another (balance) and those that have these, but in such a bad way they are barely used (balance). This three different cases show that limitation is not an issue.
- Pritiviraj exists but the campaign is based on the legends based on his life - so they are not what happened, but a fairy tale of what happened -, that’s my point. And now I also remember Spirit of the Law video about the Portuguese campaign, that have scenarios invented to tell other things that happened during the journeys through African coast but not really related to Francisco de Almeida.
- Again, Szaladon and AnaWinters are two easy names that come to my mind with ideas for north american civ. It’s a matter of checking what they posted and then check sources about those stories.
1 Like
The developers have already made region-specific generic units for civs that don’t lack gunpowder and/or cavalry, why can’t they just create more?
4 Likes
Balance issue just look at the Stepp Lancer.
2 Likes
You seem to be missing the point behind my words, I’ll reinterate them to you one last time,
-
I am not talking anything about balance, all that I’m literally saying is that under the current Civ design rules the Devs have set for themselves (I.E. Meso cannot have Horses or Gunpowder), An African Civ has greater room for interesting design than an American civ since they have access to all the basic things a Meso Civ (outside of Eagles) alongside potential access to Gunpowder and Cavalry. The Historical sources that could be used for potential scenarios are also far better for an African civ. This is not me saying there should never be any new American Civs, this is me saying that an potential African Civ inherently has more to offer to the game in terms of new interesting things than a potential American civ. That is all
-
Just because it is questionable whether Francisco Almeida fought with a gun on horseback or not doesn’t mean that the game isn’t making an attempt each time to be historically rooted. A hypothetical North American campaign that isn’t about them being conquered by Europeans, would have to have a story based in near complete fiction due to there being literally no pre-columbian North American Native wrriten records, this isn’t the case with Prithviraj or the Portuguese campaign as even if they’re historically inaccurate, they’re still clearly historically rooted in real events. Campaigns being based on clear historical events has always being a thing Ensemble and Forgotten Empire studio has consistently followed.
-
Please post examples of work from Szaladon and Anawinters then if it exists as I cannot see examples of it in this thread, it is also not respectful of my time to ask me to claw through their post histories just to find the supporting evidence to your point. I atleast gave you wikipedia articles to clarify what I meant
2 Likes
They can and I honestly wouldn’t be opposed to such a thing, but balance issues as Mahazona said (Just look at the Steppe Lancer) and would neccesitate reworking pre-existing civs. Also if such a thing is purely to address the lack of interesting things you can do with Meso Civ design due to not having Horses or Gunpowder, why not just make a non-Meso Civ instead and achieve roughly the same result but with less chaos?
There’s Hernando de Sotos accounts of his travels through the Southern part of the Americas. @AnaWinters probably knows also some more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernando_de_Soto#De_Soto’s_exploration_of_North_America
There’s always also Oral traditions with all their advantages and issues.
I’ve recently ordered this book too picturing in details about the Mississippian culture:
A read which I recommend to anyone is 1491 by Charles Mann.
1 Like
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/lyptwr/the_great_plains_of_huntergatherers/
There’s sources galore here. Keep in mind it’s likely the cultures didn’t change all that much - the descendants of these cultures still exist (the Mississippians are probably the Natives of the Ohio River Valley at this point) or just straight-up still exist - like the Diné, who are just the Pueblo by a different name.
https://www.reddit.com/r/IndianCountry/comments/q87zr5/the_great_plains_of_hunter_gatherers/>
This is by the same author as the previous, but has more information on it and excludes some in the previous post, so I tend to just post both.
TLDR There’s more than enough information, people are just too damn lazy to look for it or they come into the topic with preconceptions and the first thing they find that backs up their initial thoughts is where they stop looking.
5 Likes