DLC - Other than new civs, what new features/content would you like to see added?

Von Clausewitz himself said that Europeans fought mostly the same

2 Likes

Maybe I should explain it differently so that what I’m request is better understood.

I want civilizations to have as a mechanic the ability to use their colonies or similar from the beginning to be able to play with those civilizations, and with that gain new units, buildings, cards and mechanics. (Basically I want to be able to play directly with the revolution)

For example, I would like Spain to be able to use the viceroyalty of Peru and in that way play with Peru without the need to wait until the industrial age.

There would be units that would be replaced or changed for balance or to promote the characteristics of that “variant civilization”, for example the Peruvian guard would no longer be a revolutionary, it would be a grenadier or soldier with a grenade attack.

Additionally, Peru could have a good number of cards that improve the grenadier/soldier and perhaps the ability to ally with the Quechua


I hope now you understand better what I’m talking about. :slightly_smiling_face:

PS: Enthusiasts of a possible division of India and Germany could benefit from this idea.

1 Like

Something like this is what should have been done instead of Mexico and USA as standalone civs. Have the revolutions available much earlier and let you continue to age up and branch out with different states or successive revolts.

2 Likes

Yeah that would have been awesome.

Basically you choose the narrative of your civ. That way you can choose to splinter off from Spain in say Fortress and become one of the independent but Spanish-derived nations. It would have also (for me) solved the whole weird anachronistic way that Mexico etc all mess around with the time frame as they would start from their Mother country regardless.

Hey-ho!

2 Likes

That ship has already sailed. Furthermore, it doesn’t seem wrong to me to want to add post-colonial civilizations, especially because I want Argentina as a complete civilization.


Yes, for example, the great Colombia could give way to Venezuela, Colombia, Panamá or Ecuador.


That would be the idea in general terms, although it applies to all nations in the game, not just the Europeans, for example, imagine India.


I think you give too much importance to the timeline, something the developers use as a guide and not so much as a law.

2 Likes

Yes, you have 4 historical campaigns and nothing more:

  1. TWC campaigns:

A) Fire (1775-1781): American War of Independence

B) Shadow (1866-1876): Red Cloud and Black Hills Wars (in the original game)

  1. TAD campaigns, except the Chinese one:

A) Japan (1600): Unification of Japan

B) India (1857): Sepoy Revolution

Well, the Ayyubids and Zhu Xi have it…

Exactly, AoE 3 civs are differentiated by region, not by mechanics like AoE 4…

What I’m most looking forward to, aside from the new civilizations announced, is an overhaul of generic units, like hussars and cannon crews.

Civilizations with single skin hussars in common : USA, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Great Britain, France, Italy, Malta

Civilizations with hussars with a unique skin: Russia (Cossacks), Ottoman (Delis), Germany (Uhlans)

And here I’m not talking about dragoons which are even more generic for the civilizations which have access to them

Civilizations with common single skin cannon crews: Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Italy, Malta

Civilizations with cannon crews with a unique skin: Ottoman, USA (if we consider Gatling gun crew is unique, although this type of cannon is totally anachronistic, if it were up to me, I would replace it with the falconet)

3 Likes

Britain has a unique skin
Others in this list have a popular more unique cav they use predominantely anyway (lancers, cuirs, portugese goons)

Those are not hussars, they are heavy cav with somewhat similar roles

2 Likes

Yes, Britain has a unique skin, but only once you look for the guard improvement, which is not available before age IV, plus you must send the church card which give you access to better skins (musk+huss)

All you have listed (lancers, leathers, Portuguese goons) are more expensive cavalry and I would say more late game type of units

Yes, those are not, that’s my point, similar cavalry (similar stats, similar cost), but not huss
I meant in my post that I want more identity for each civs

thats pretty normal tbh. only exception is like the recent ottoman and russia reworks. All standard euro units with same basestats have the same skin and thats a good thing. it shows players: those units are the same, no special gimmicks i have to keep in mind. royal guard units have 10% better stats and a different name, thats why they get a different skin. russia and ottomans got new skins, cause their units are different from the base eu unit roster. if you want different huss to be more special, and not only in apperance, it would be a fundamental redesign of how euro civs work.

no. brit huss and musk have different royal guard skins by default. if u send the church card your red coats get a more unique skin, doesnt change anything for the huss

not really, they are normal age 3 units. goons are cheaper, lancers are the same price.

my point is, many civs have unique cav already. they dont need a special huss variation. spain, portugal, france have better cav options… they only go huss in niche situations. malta doesnt use cav a lot. sweden uses inf mostly, sometimes trabants. dutch and usa go for ruyters/carabiners or stratiot/magyar huss pops…
on the surface i agree with you, 1/9 huss has a unique skin… looks a bit boring. but if you think about how many times you’ll actually see them in game (after age2) its more like 1/3… excluding georgian hussars, magyar hussars and the occasional chilean death huss.

maybe well get more huss variation if they include the polish civ in the next dlc?

1 Like

I hear that for Russia. However there was a period where it was hussars for Ottomans, same as EU, they changed that cause it wasn’t ‘turkish’ enough, then if it was done with Ottomans we might ask why not for other civilisations

For cavalry it’s not that important though, it is more cannon crew that bother me

1 Like

Exactly, and it could even pack in the bulk of the content of the current Mexican and American civs by having variations on each revolt depending on what age you revolted in and what civ you started from. For example Dutch USA could get options like New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, while British USA could revolt as early as age 2 and get states like Carolina, Virginia, and Massachusetts, or wait to revolt later to get other states.

Spain would be an absolute beast though with all the Latin American nations and subsequent revolts in places like Mexico and Gran Colombia. But most of these nations were not until the 1810s so they could probably be limited to mostly age 4/5 alternatives.

Portugal could be interesting with a revolt to Brazil and the ability to revert back to Portugal with another revolution.

2 Likes

I would like to see Achievements for Revolutions. For example:

  • Spilled tea - Playing as Brits civ in a 1 vs 1 game against the USA civs go to the US revolution and win.
  • Victory of X -. Add an achievement for the victory of each civ and revolution.
1 Like

Rework the campaigns to include the new civs and mechanics from DE. Not just the Inca.

4 Likes

It would take a lot of work or it would break the balance of the campaign (imagine teleporting units in the Morgan campaign, Gatlings in the Amelia campaign, Mexicans in the Chayton campaign it would be interesting - in 1866 they were immersed in the Second Mexican Empire of Maximilian I with the French intervention of Napoleon III and in 1876 they entered in the Porfiriato that lasts until 1911; in the Amelia campaign they are represented by Spanish, but that is fine, because in 1817 Mexico was the Viceroyalty of New Spain, although the Rodeleros feel very anachronistic for the beginning of the 19th century)…

1 Like

I would like changes in civilization and revoltn of USA:

First, the Gatling: I mean, the guy who came up with that would have to be drunk, at what point would a Civil War era invention have a place in the commercial age, an age that’s supposed to represent the independance war era, one century earlier ?
I talked about that in another topic yet but if it was up to me, I would replace that by falconets, and move this Gatling in the imperial, or at least industrial age.

Secondly, the revolution : the regulars here have the apparence of guard regulars, (I would say that the guard regulars represent US army of the war of 1812 given that they have shakos), and again, this rev suppose to represent the beginning of USA (1770-1790’s), even the flag can confirm that. I propose a rework of this regulars to give them the apparence of regulars of independance war era.

2 Likes

Of course, I meant that in Amelia’s campaign it would look strange to create Gatlings instead of rockets in the industrial age…

The United States could perhaps get the Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon in a future update that can replace the [Heavy Cannon] for them which will be trained from the [Factory].

The Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon may look and function very similar to the [Gatling Gun] but it shot large caliber shells instead of cartridges like the Gatling Gun did.

If is possible to implement it would be nice if Buffalo Soldiers were actual units in the game instead of being the name of a Home City card for the United States.

1 Like

That campaign has so many anachronisms that it wouldn’t look that strange :rofl:

1 Like

That’s true xd…American railroads in Mexican Texas in 1817…I knew that the railroad expanded at the beginning of the 19th century, but not so fast xd…

  • The campaign also depicts railroads in the southwestern United States, which wouldn’t come till the 1860s. The steam locomotive was created in 1804 in Great Britain and by 1817 the process of expansion of the railroad on the east coast of the United States could have begun[2], although it would not reach Louisiana and Texas until 1841. In addition, the first railroad companies would not be created until the decades of the 1820s-1830s, several years after the Steel campaign.
1 Like